Skip to main content

About your Search

Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)
-japanese protests started causing a protest of japanese protests and those who use them. and the protests are so bad that a chinese man made the simple mistake of driving a japanese car in a chai neads city of chian and was beat sewn badly he is paralyzed. this week, a chinese minister accused a japanese vessel of target i targeting the radar on a japanese ship off of the islands, but the chinese officials are disputing it happened. now think about this, the world's second and the third largest economies playing chicken in the pacific over a dispute of uninhabited islands, but if this diplomatic disagreement were to escalate into a military obligation, the united states would be obligated by the 52-year-old treaty obligation to help the sovereignty of japan, and does that mean that north korea would come to the aid of china, but it is a quaint and admittedly alarmist experiment, because that is not how foreign wars are conducted anymore. next month marks the 10-year invasion of iraq, and the last conflict that we can think of conventional war that claimed the lives of more than 4,000 americans and b
delivered in the u.s. capital in this must have pomp and circumstance. president obama's first state of the union since his re-election will be ambitious in his vision and no doubt punctuated. maybe some of us watching at home will be applauding. if you are near a television, the state of the union will be unavoidable. the networks and cable news will, as always, broadcast wall-to-wall coverage of the speech. the attention given to the president's speech is indicative of everything that falls under the category, very important things required by the constitution. have you ever noticed how the constitution described the state of the union? you might be surprised to find the founders are vague and sound bored with the whole idea of it. article two, section three reads he shall from time-to-time give to the congress information of the state of the union. recommend to their consideration such measures as he may judge necessary and expedient. he may. on extraordinary occasions, convene both houses or either of them. in disagreement with them, he may adjourn them to such times he thinks pr
johnson signed the law in 1965, americans of color get that right and states, like yours, could not use tactics to undermine it. he explained the importance of section five best on in the speech saying the heart of the act is plain. wherever by clear and objective standards, states and counties are using regulations or laws or tests to deny the right to vote, then they will be struck down. it is clear state officials intend to discriminate. the federal examiners will be sent in to register all voters. when the process of elimination is gone, the examiners will be withdrawn. for the first time millions of african-americans could vote without undue influence or violence. let's be honest about a few things. first, 1965 was not that long ago. even if the images are in black and white, it's around the corner historically. and the redistricting plan was as recent as 2006. the process that will unravel or sustain a key act begins. the way the supreme court decides is vitally important and could leave many americans, particularly americans of color with less right to vote. there's a lot to unpa
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)